“You know that the kings of the nations exercise authority over them, and their leaders rule over them. This, however, is not the way it shall be among you”. Matthew 20,25-26
“My kingship is not of this world. If my kingship were of this world, my servants would fight, that I might not be handed over. But my kingship is not of this world. ” John 18,36
“For the people of this world are much -more shrewd in handling their affairs than the people who belong to the light”, Luke 16,8.
Secular parallels
Is the authority which Jesus gave to his disciples parallel to
secular authority or is it different?
It is not so easy to answer this question, but it is a fundamental question, a question from which our prayerful reflection must start. When Jesus conferred authority on his apostles, did he have a secular model in mind?
In his teaching, Jesus often adduced examples from everyday human experience. Speaking in the context of authority, he occasionally pointed to contemporary ideas of kingship. God the Father is like a king who called his governors to account, (Mt 18,23) who prepared a wedding feast for his son (Mt 22,2) or who entrusted his wealth to investors while going on a far journey. (Lk 19,12) Jesus described himself as a king when sketching the judgement scene, (Mt 25,31) and allowed others to call him king at the glorious entry to Jerusalem, (Lk 19,38) before Pilate (Jn 18,33) and during his crucifixion. (Jn 19,21; Lk 23,37)
When praying that his Father’s “kingdom” might come, he added that this would mean that his Father’s will “be done on earth as in heaven”. (Mt 6,10) Obviously, Jesus drew parallels between God’s authority and the way authority was exercised by kings in his own days. And this royal authority was shared by his apostles who were sent as Jesus was sent (Jn 20,21) and who will “sit on twelve thrones”. (Mt 19,28)
History confirms the influence of secular kingship ideas on ruling in the church.
Since the Vatican Council, such a display of secular majesty is now being discouraged also in the Catholic Church. The fact remains that much in the exercise of episcopal power derives from secular sources.
The influence of secular thinking on the church is neither avoidable nor in itself wrong. Christ did not determine for every century and every nation how the church should meet the new challenges she would face in them. Moreover, the church is not only a spiritual community. She also functions as an external organization. In this, she can and should learn from secular society.
“Since the church has a visible and social structure as a sign of unity in Christ, she can and ought to be enriched by the development of human social life. The reason is not that the constitution given to her by Christ is defective, but so that she may understand it more penetratingly, express it better, and adjust it more successfully to our time.” Vatican II. The Church Today, no 44
We may expect that in matters of organization many parallels will be found between the exercise of authority inside and outside of the church.
Not so among you
At the same time it would be a fatal mistake to infer that the authority Jesus gave was entirely the same in nature as secular authority.
Jesus tells Pilate: “My kingdom does not belong to this world” and explains that otherwise his passion would not have occurred. (Jn 18,36) Jesus strongly opposed any attempt on the part of his disciples to make him a king in a worldly sense. ( Jn 6,15) When he entered Jerusalem in procession, he refused to ride on a horse, as secular kings would do, but rode on a donkey instead. (Mt 21,5.)
The instruments of secular authority are money, arms and force. Jesus denies to his disciples the use of any of them. “Do not carry any gold, silver or copper coins in your pockets”. (Mt 10,9) “Put your sword back, for all who take the sword will die by the sword”, (Mt 26,52) “If anyone strikes you on the cheek, let him strike the other one too”. (Lk 6,29.)
Does secular authority govern like that?
Jesus forbids competition (exalting oneself), (Lk 18,14) party formation (loving only those who love you) (Lk 6,32) and the struggle for rank (to be the greatest). (Mk 10,41) No ordinary authority in society can be gained without all this.
The authority Jesus entrusts is of a different nature.
Jesus teaches the contrast explicitly. “You know that the kings of the nations exercise authority over them, and their leaders rule over them. This, however, is not the way it shall be among you”. (Mt 20,25-26.) The context is James’ and John’s request to sit at Jesus’ right and left hand. The apostles are thinking of authority in a worldly sense: of wielding power over others as government officials did. Jesus opposed it strongly. “It shall not be so among you”. “The authority you have is different in nature from the power exercised by earthly officials. Do not model the way you influence others on the ways of secular government. Do not assume your position is comparable to that of a political ruler”.
Jesus’ warning resounds through the ages. It forces us to examine our conscience whenever there is a “struggle for power” in the Church.
The Crisis in Authority
At present conflicting forces are at work in the church. A good number of people are dissatisfied with the prevailing system through which authority is exercised. There are also attempts at renewal which take their starting point from a search for a relevant and dynamic leadership. On the other hand, resistance to renewal is often rooted in the fear that ecclesiastical authority is being lost or undermined. Under disagreement on pastoral issues lies a severe clash regarding the true nature of ecclesiastical authority itself.
The problem of authority is not new to the church. It demands a solution in every new era of her life. The reason lies in the tension between Christ’s lasting ideal of pastoral authority and the necessity to learn from contemporary society. It is the tension between the spiritual and secular models from which we copy. At present many powerful trends of thought struggle for acceptance.
We should realise that this tension is a problem for the whole church and each of its members. The tension is not between us, but in us. It is entirely wrong to place the bishops and superiors on one side and the ordinary faithful on the other, as if different ideas of authority would characterise either side. It is not true. There is, and should be, a search in each person. And if a person in responsibility feels the problem more acutely, this does not force him or her into a different category. Neither is it correct to emphasize the distinction between “conservative” and “progressive” camps. Some may be more inclined to maintain the status-quo, while others will favour bold renewal. Both manifest fluctuations in the same common quest. We are not doing a service to the church by “taking sides”.
Rather we should make sure that as responsible members of Christ’s Body we help the church to move forwards by sincere study, by thoughtful prayer and readiness to do the Lord’s will.
It is interesting to note that the apostles were ready enough to say: “Lord, teach us how to pray”, (Lk 11,1) but with regard to authority it was Jesus who had to take the initiative. (Mk 10,35-35) They thought they already knew what his authority meant. Is it for this reason that Jesus cures the blind man immediately afterwards, to show them that they too should ask “Lord make us see”? (Mk 10,46-52)
Is it not a prayer each one of us should make?